EU Graphical Update Feedback - Hands and Feet

[SigmaOZ]

As a matter of fact, I have a stock picture of a Miqo from 1.0

here it is:

That clearly shows how much better the models were in 1.X, I wish they brought them back.


Modern GPUs should be more than enough to handle the high polygon count.

[CidHeiral]

Well if the Hrothgal legs are any indication that is most likely being addressed in the graphical update. I assume the model they're using is just a downscaled version of the Dawntrail one.

[Ath192]

That clearly shows how much better the models were in 1.X, I wish they brought them back.


Modern GPUs should be more than enough to handle the high polygon count.

I remember running this game in 1,000 dollar laptop in 2010. It wasnt smooth but it was playable. Surely 13 years later we can run even better looking models imo.

[Eraden]

Is reason why nots able has bare feets in game? Stock shoes coverings up bad feets? Mao also nots impressed with high heel shoes. 2B boots look likes torture devices for feets. Is why Mao prefers Type 51 boots and legs. Mao thinkings feets problems is WAY more urgent than messings with limbal eye rings.

[TheDustyOne]

The sandals of the bare feet models I believe are to make the foot relatively consistent between "bare" feet and when you have shoes with any heel on.

When high heels like the 2B shoes get equipped, instead of offsetting the model upwards a set distance, it instead just... cuts off part of the leg. And because the rig for our characters aren't made for the feet at that angle, it deforms very, very strangely. It's why I don't use the 2B heels on my highlander. If we were to fix heels and make them work properly, we'd have to introduce a proper IK system to the animations and rigs to account for our characters having heels, which can eat a lot of resources if you have a bunch of characters on screen. IK animations tend to work better in more controlled environments compared to MMOs.

We don't have many high heels in the game anyway, and the ones that do exist aren't all that high with exceptions like the 2B boots.

That said, it would be neat if Square could think of improving on the animation system as a whole with the graphics update; better blending between animations, IK systems to properly plant our feet on the ground (with a possible heel fix), and transitions between certain animations. We don't need the actual motion physics from 1.0, but having our characters use a starting and stopping animation that blends seamlessly when we move around helps a lot for making movement feel fluid.

[MsQi]

That clearly shows how much better the models were in 1.X, I wish they brought them back.


Modern GPUs should be more than enough to handle the high polygon count.

There were obviously systems then that could handle it. They could have had graphic options that allowed players to choose higher or lower quality models instead of throwing all that out. It's funny that the difference between highest and lowest quality in the game now is so narrow. Must be the console mentality.

[TheDustyOne]

The main reason for the graphics downgrade going from 1.0 to 2.0 was because of accessibility; 1.0 at the time required a powerhouse of a PC to get going and that ultimately cuts into how many people can actually play your game. Of course, the fact that the original 1.0 team also wanted it on PS3 was.... I have no idea how they would've done that, but the visual 2.0 downgrade was the only real way to have a PS3 version that seemed viable. But still, the main reason wasn't just consoles, but also weaker PCs at the time.

It's also worth noting that 1.0, while it had higher polygon characters and objects, also didn't have proper lighting and shadows. There's a video from the Speakers Network youtube channel that goes over the major graphical differences in 1.0, and it shows just how poor the lighting actually was then; light sources weren't proper light sources, night-time amounted to a "blue tint" on the screen, shadows weren't really cast from those light sources, bloom was overused in places, etc. 1.0 was a buggy, unoptimized mess and even the supposed better graphics were a victim of that mess. The main thing it had over 2.0 was texture and polygon count, maybe a shader or two. I'll see if I can find the video at some point and edit the post with it.

Edit: found the video https://youtu.be/CJ9CmxaQ3q8?si=MhVQ9Msas5yrPVcl&t=464

[MsQi]

But still, the main reason wasn't just consoles, but also weaker PCs at the time.

You may find this hard to believe but you can have a single game that takes advantage the latest bleeding edge technologies and still runs smoothly on much older systems. They are applying a console mentality to the PC world.

[Rolder50]

You may find this hard to believe but you can have a single game that takes advantage the latest bleeding edge technologies and still runs smoothly on much older systems. They are applying a console mentality to the PC world.

Yep, it's called... graphics settings! Wow!

[TheDustyOne]

You can only do so much however, if you want to include high poly and high res texture assets alongside the weaker systems, that also means having to have the storage space for both to swap between and making both assets with each patch. This effectively doubles workload to appease people who have high end PCs and still affects storage space for PCs that have less storage to take advantage of.

As for bleeding edge tech, while I don't disagree, we're still talking about a game that was rushed out after only 2 years of development (MMOs typically need 5). And a choice between having bleeding edge tech that only a small amount of players will be able to use that we can't properly QA with this short development period that won't even be used on one of our major platforms, and simply having uniform assets amongst the playerbase, yeah there's a reason that Square chose what they chose.

That's not to say we didn't get improvements however, HW I believe made the 64 bit version a thing, and DX11 with it, and that had a handful of extra graphical tweaks and additions. And of course the graphical update is about bringing in that tech after all this time. But that 32 bit version still had to exist, and as long as it existed, they were constrained by that version. The fact we could take advantage of 64 bit didn't fully give them extra advantages. It was only after we got rid of those low end PCs that we could move past that limitation, you can only go so far between high and low end PCs.